Stefan Santesson

The current text is correct. The new identifier is still on the ETSI roadmap.

I think this is a very premature decision on the definitive format of access certificates that does not harmonize with the latest Implementing acts. Referring to recital 7 of PID...

If relying parties are represented in the trust infrastructure only through its Access Certificate CA, the problem yet to be solved is how to convey and validate the metadata of...

We just finished a workshop in OpenID fed in Stockholm with implementers from all over the world. We discussed this in detail and there was a general consensus among those...

> Hi Stefan, can you explain at which point this worked in VP, and what the client passed in the request in the case it worked? (I am pretty certain...

> I think the problem actually started at the point we added the `client_id_scheme` parameter in early 2023. > > > To make this work, it MUST be the choice...

> The current mental model is that it is unlikely for any kind of negotiation to happen beforehand, but the request itself should carry everything necessary and allow optionality where...

Just a stupid question from one that still stuggles to understand all bits of this document. Reading #248 I notice the following solution: ``` "header": { "client_id": "https://rp.federation.eu", "client_id_scheme": "entity_id"...

I will look into the details, but this feels backwards and deviates how protocols normally handle signature interoperability. The normal way to handle this, in my experience, is to put...